Duke/Margrave Dynamic

[BardicNerd]

In Zonasa, the ruler appoints the dukes, and the dukes get to appoint all the lords of any regions in their duchy, including margraves.  So the positions are separate, but if the duke wants what is probably the best region, they're free to give it to themselves.

Though I've been moving towards combining one region duchies with larger ones, so we (until the stronghold was [strike]taken[/strike] borrowed by Cathay) had a duchy with both a city and a stronghold, and if the duke of either Batesoar or Alanurs gives their position up for some reason, we'll probably have a duchy with two cities.  In which case I think we'd have three duchies that each have two margraves in them (due to a townsland margrave) which would probably be a pretty firm case of dukes and margraves being different even if most of the dukes still made themselves margraves.

[Telrunya]

I think you see the seperation slowly happening, and it's not odd either a Duke is Margrave as well on the other hand (especially a Duke picking the wealthiest region for himself, though that can be Mountains as well). Fronen has a Rural Duke, Riombara has a Duke without land and Elections are causing Dukes and Margraves to be seperated (Will have a non-city duke soon as well). For example, it would also make sense for Riombara to combine the Duchies of Rines and Athol Margos into a Duchy of the Islands, but you simply don't easily abolish such longtime entities and that's why that doesn't happen. But the new land being taken show some desire to not have every City be a Duchy, it's easier to make such changes there.

It's a longterm thing, and can only change very slowly, but I think it's happening here and there.

[Chenier]

As opposed to the King who usually has no lands at all?

D'Haran PMs often held a city...

And realms are usually much bigger than duchies, granting them a larger tax base.

If you don't give your king a duchy, that's your own problem.

[vonGenf]

The new system allows duchies not to be geography-based. I really like realms which have created duchies with no link to a given region. Duke is really a title you give to a person, and not to their region.

In Morek for example, when we took Nifelheim everyone just assumed a duchy would be created out of it. However many people opposed giving the title of Duke to the Margrave of the city (he is of the wrong religion). That created quite some debate, but at first everyone just assumed the only two possible outcomes would be for the Margrave to step down or to be named Duke. Truth is, there is absolutely no need for a Duchy of Nifelheim to exist, and Nifelheim is still part of the Muspelheim duchy today.

[Chenier]

The new system allows duchies not to be geography-based. I really like realms which have created duchies with no link to a given region. Duke is really a title you give to a person, and not to their region.

In Morek for example, when we took Nifelheim everyone just assumed a duchy would be created out of it. However many people opposed giving the title of Duke to the Margrave of the city (he is of the wrong religion). That created quite some debate, but at first everyone just assumed the only two possible outcomes would be for the Margrave to step down or to be named Duke. Truth is, there is absolutely no need for a Duchy of Nifelheim to exist, and Nifelheim is still part of the Muspelheim duchy today.

I never said it should never be separate titles held by different people.

It would be odd for the Marquis of Raviel to become duke of Port Nebel, though.

[vonGenf]

I never said it should never be separate titles held by different people.

It would be odd for the Marquis of Raviel to become duke of Port Nebel, though.

Why? If the Duchy of Port Nebel is an entity includes both Port Nebel and Raviel, it's fine. My Beluaterra character will soon be Count of Droxago and Duke of Athol Margos, and I don't mind.

What would be weird is if Port Nebel swore allegiance to a different duchy when a Duchy of Port Nebel exists.....

[Eirikr]

Why? If the Duchy of Port Nebel is an entity includes both Port Nebel and Raviel, it's fine. My Beluaterra character will soon be Count of Droxago and Duke of Athol Margos, and I don't mind.

What would be weird is if Port Nebel swore allegiance to a different duchy when a Duchy of Port Nebel exists.....

This. As a result, I have been in heavy support of renaming duchies away from their geographical names.

I think the thing people are really having a hard time with is that a duke can function a lot like a ruler in that he no longer needs an estate or to own a region.

The other thing to add here is that Coria actually has a law against holding two positions simultaneously (lordship and government and now duke since it is actually possible). If we decide to keep it as one position, guess what's getting revised?

[Blue Star]

This. As a result, I have been in heavy support of renaming duchies away from their geographical names.

I think the thing people are really having a hard time with is that a duke can function a lot like a ruler in that he no longer needs an estate or to own a region.

The other thing to add here is that Coria actually has a law against holding two positions simultaneously (lordship and government and now duke since it is actually possible). If we decide to keep it as one position, guess what's getting revised?

That is very true, yet I remember that being on a case by case bases so, it be up to the senate at least in Coria  .

[egamma]

I never said it should never be separate titles held by different people.

It would be odd for the Marquis of Raviel to become duke of Port Nebel, though.

Would it be as strange if the duchy was named "Duchy of Raviel Isle"?

[Chenier]

Would it be as strange if the duchy was named "Duchy of Raviel Isle"?

Remember the fuss over renaming the duchy of Sallowtown to duchy of Sallowcape?

Yea...

[Scarlett]

I mentioned this in another thread but here it is again.

In Cathay the mandate (from me) is to separate the positions. There are a couple exceptions - one as the result of a political deal Galiard made when re-forming Cathay where the Duke of the capital is also the margrave, and the other is Galiard himself, though that's more of a custom than a rule: no King shall hold land that was not added to the Kingdom under his reign. We would've played Musical Duchies and given him a rural or woodland region/1-region duchy initially but Haul is unique enough that we'll probably just leave it there, assuming we hold on to it.

In the long run it is tremendously beneficial. Adding another tier on the ladder draws out the number of stops characters make in their political career and it also de-centralizes power. Under the old system, rulers were completely at the mercy of their Dukes. Now, they still are in many respects (as they should be) but the Duke doesn't necessarily command both the land and the gold - the city lords have more financial power than the rural lords but they don't have the same social and political power that old-style Dukes used to have. My rule for a long time in BM was that Duke was the best possible job: very difficult to get rid of and richer than anybody. Now things are more complicated and less lopsided.

It's also nice to add flavor by naming the duchies something other than what the cities were named. This is a requirement in Cathay as well. For everybody except the Duke of Anacan, I guess.

[Eirikr]

That is very true, yet I remember that being on a case by case bases so, it be up to the senate at least in Coria  .

The law would still get revised such that Margrave and Duke are considered one position and thus do not need to be considered a "special case."

In response to Scarlett, I agree with the idea as well. One of the reasons I'm pushing so hard in Coria for it is to balance out power a little more than it is now. But, you know, if Coria wants me to start trying to take more power, I can cope...

[Chenier]

I mentioned this in another thread but here it is again.

In Cathay the mandate (from me) is to separate the positions. There are a couple exceptions - one as the result of a political deal Galiard made when re-forming Cathay where the Duke of the capital is also the margrave, and the other is Galiard himself, though that's more of a custom than a rule: no King shall hold land that was not added to the Kingdom under his reign. We would've played Musical Duchies and given him a rural or woodland region/1-region duchy initially but Haul is unique enough that we'll probably just leave it there, assuming we hold on to it.

In the long run it is tremendously beneficial. Adding another tier on the ladder draws out the number of stops characters make in their political career and it also de-centralizes power. Under the old system, rulers were completely at the mercy of their Dukes. Now, they still are in many respects (as they should be) but the Duke doesn't necessarily command both the land and the gold - the city lords have more financial power than the rural lords but they don't have the same social and political power that old-style Dukes used to have. My rule for a long time in BM was that Duke was the best possible job: very difficult to get rid of and richer than anybody. Now things are more complicated and less lopsided.

It's also nice to add flavor by naming the duchies something other than what the cities were named. This is a requirement in Cathay as well. For everybody except the Duke of Anacan, I guess.

That's all fine if you have lots of nobles and little land. When you have lots of land and few nobles, division of power isn't so practical anymore, because you tend to give titles away to unworthy candidates just because the worthy ones already have other titles.

[Blue Star]

Nothing is wrong with the idea of division of labor... Beside the point it takes longer to get things accomplished. The more ladders in the hierarchy the more difficult it is to get things done... XP

[Scarlett]

That's all fine if you have lots of nobles and little land. When you have lots of land and few nobles, division of power isn't so practical anymore, because you tend to give titles away to unworthy candidates just because the worthy ones already have other titles.

This is a very good point, though we don't really have lots of nobles - but we don't have the Dwilight problem of a heckuvalot of a land for few nobles.

If that were the case I wouldn't outlaw the practice of Duke = Margrave but I'd still encourage it when expedient.